First, let's admit that there is no such thing as purely objective observation. Thoreau understood that he was a player in the processes of natural discovery. Pure objectivity plays second fiddle to subjective involvement. We, mankind, are part of everything. Laura says, "Phenomena are as [Thoreau] puts it, not independent of us but related to us, and that our knowledge can exist only in that shifting field between ourselves and our 'objects.' What Thoreau was arguing against was the 'ideology' of representation...which objectifies the world as thing, then asserts that what is out there can be correctly, i.e. objectively seen." (p.206)
Of course there is much more to the ideas of empirical holism and Laura does a good job of explaining them and Thoreau's interpretations and understanding of Humboldtian science.
We are involved, aren't we in the processes of nature? Can't we see that objective distance is impossible? When I finished the book I took my leaf blower and cleared off the driveway and wondered how many processes I had affected in doing so. I was a player, wasn't I?